Cooper v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
From the Circuit Court of Shelby. Tried before the lion. S. II. Srrott. The defendant in this caso was indicted for grand larceny, and the indictment also contained a count for receiving stolen goods.
Read the full summary
From the Circuit Court of Shelby. Tried before the lion. S. II. Srrott. The defendant in this caso was indicted for grand larceny, and the indictment also contained a count for receiving stolen goods. On the trial, he reserved exceptions to the refusal of several charges asked, and also to the action of the court in recalling the jury, after they had retired to consider of their verdict, and allowing the solicitor to re-examine a witness as to the value of the stolen goods; and these rulings arc here urged as error.
1Opinion of the Court
CLÓPTON, J.
After the jury had been charged, and had retired, the court recalled them, and permitted the State to introduce evidence as to the value of the goods alleged to have been stolen. The defendant objected to the jury being recalled, and additional evidence introduced, on the specified ground, *55that written charges, which had been requested by the defendant, and refused, were based on the fact, that there was no evidence of the value. The record shows that evidence of the value of the stolen property was introduced during the progress of the trial, substantially the same as after the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hobbs v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Collins v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
3Cited by8 opinions
- Leith v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Harper v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Brickley v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.